1
|
Fidlers T, Narducci F, Pasquesoone C, Hudry D, Mailliez A, Becourt S, Miled AB, Leblanc E, Gómez CM. [Is there a place for prophylactic fimbriectomy followed by delayed ovariectomy?]. Bull Cancer 2025; 112:316-325. [PMID: 40049799 DOI: 10.1016/j.bulcan.2024.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2024] [Revised: 07/15/2024] [Accepted: 07/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2025]
Abstract
Risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy has long been the gold standard for preventing the development of tubo-ovarian cancers in high-risk population such as BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Although a clear survival benefit has been demonstrated of these prophylactic procedures, important side effect from the associated surgical menopause have been described. Given that recent evidence suggests that most high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC), the majority of all ovarian carcinomas, and especially for patients with a genetic predisposition originate in the fallopian tube, where also precursor lesions such as STIC can be found, an alternative risk reduction strategy has emerged, the prophylactic fimbriectomy with delayed oophorectomy. Multiple studies have already investigated the acceptability, side effects and safety of this procedure, with promising results. And currently multiple studies are ongoing to investigate the long-term effects on sexuality and the risk of developing subsequent tubo-ovarian carcinomas. A long-term follow-up in a large population is essential given the latency of 4-5 years between precursor lesions and HGSC. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge on the origin, screening, and risk-reducing surgery for the prevention of tubo-ovarian cancers in high-risk women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tom Fidlers
- Département d'oncologie chirurgicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, avenue Frédéric-Combemale, 5900 Lille, France
| | - Fabrice Narducci
- Département d'oncologie chirurgicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, avenue Frédéric-Combemale, 5900 Lille, France
| | | | - Delphine Hudry
- Département d'oncologie chirurgicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, avenue Frédéric-Combemale, 5900 Lille, France
| | - Audrey Mailliez
- Département d'oncologie médicale et oncogénétique, centre Oscar-Lambret, Lille, France
| | - Stéphanie Becourt
- Département d'oncologie médicale et oncogénétique, centre Oscar-Lambret, Lille, France
| | | | - Eric Leblanc
- Département d'oncologie chirurgicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, avenue Frédéric-Combemale, 5900 Lille, France
| | - Carlos Martínez Gómez
- Département d'oncologie chirurgicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, avenue Frédéric-Combemale, 5900 Lille, France.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Taylor A, Clement K, Hillard T, Sassarini J, Ratnavelu N, Baker-Rand H, Bowen R, Davies MC, Edey K, Fernandes A, Ghaem-Maghami S, Gomes N, Gray S, Hughes E, Hudson A, Manchanda R, Manley K, Nicum S, Phillips A, Richardson A, Morrison J. British Gynaecological Cancer Society and British Menopause Society guidelines: Management of menopausal symptoms following treatment of gynaecological cancer. Post Reprod Health 2024; 30:256-279. [PMID: 39394654 DOI: 10.1177/20533691241286666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/13/2024]
Abstract
These guidelines have been developed jointly by the British Gynaecological Cancer Society and British Menopause Society to provide information for all healthcare professionals managing women treated for gynaecological cancer. Menopausal symptoms can have a significant impact on quality of life for women. Cancer therapies, including surgery, pelvic radiotherapy, chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, can all affect ovarian function. The benefits and risks of using hormone replacement therapy are considered by cancer type with guidance on the type of HRT and optimal time of commencement after cancer treatment. Vaginal estrogens can be very effective for improving urogenital symptoms and are safe for the majority of women, including those for whom systemic HRT is contraindicated with rare exceptions. Alternative options to HRT are reviewed including pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra Taylor
- Department of Gynaecology Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Kathryn Clement
- Department of Gynaecology, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Timothy Hillard
- Department of Gynaecology, University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK
| | - Jenifer Sassarini
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK
| | - Nithya Ratnavelu
- Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust, Gateshead, UK
| | - Holly Baker-Rand
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Grace Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK
| | - Rebecca Bowen
- Department of Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
- University of Bath, Bath, UK
| | - Melanie C Davies
- Reproductive Medicine Unit, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Katherine Edey
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Devon University NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - Andreia Fernandes
- Department of Gynaecology Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Sadaf Ghaem-Maghami
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London University, London, UK
| | - Nana Gomes
- Department of Gynaecology Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | | | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Kristyn Manley
- Department of Gynaecology, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Shibani Nicum
- Department of Medical Oncology, University College Hospital, London, UK
- University College London, London, UK
| | - Andrew Phillips
- Derby Gynaecological Cancer Centre, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Alison Richardson
- Derby Gynaecological Cancer Centre, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Jo Morrison
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Grace Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK
- Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sun L, Wei X, Fierheller CT, Dawson L, Oxley S, Kalra A, Sia J, Feldman F, Peacock S, Schrader KA, Legood R, Kwon JS, Manchanda R. Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing in Canada. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2432725. [PMID: 39264630 PMCID: PMC11393724 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.32725] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2024] [Accepted: 07/15/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Population-based BRCA testing can identify many more BRCA carriers who will be missed by the current practice of BRCA testing based on family history (FH) and clinical criteria. These carriers can benefit from screening and prevention, potentially preventing many more breast and ovarian cancers and deaths than the current practice. Objective To estimate the incremental lifetime health outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness associated with population-based BRCA testing compared with FH-based testing in Canada. Design, Setting, and Participants For this economic evaluation, a Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing for all general population women aged 30 years compared with FH-based testing. BRCA carriers are offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy to reduce their ovarian cancer risk and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography screening, medical prevention, and risk-reducing mastectomy to reduce their breast cancer risk. The analyses were conducted from both payer and societal perspectives. This study was conducted from October 1, 2022, to February 20, 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes of interest were ovarian cancer, breast cancer, additional heart disease deaths, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ICER per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic-sensitivity-analyses (PSA) were undertaken to explore the uncertainty. Results In the simulated cohort of 1 000 000 women aged 30 years in Canada, the base case ICERs of population-based BRCA testing were CAD $32 276 (US $23 402.84) per QALY from the payer perspective or CAD $16 416 (US $11 903.00) per QALY from the societal perspective compared with FH-based testing, well below the established Canadian cost-effectiveness thresholds. Population testing remained cost-effective for ages 40 to 60 years but not at age 70 years. The results were robust for multiple scenarios, 1-way sensitivity, and PSA. More than 99% of simulations from payer and societal perspectives were cost-effective on PSA (5000 simulations) at the CAD $50 000 (US $36 254.25) per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Population-based BRCA testing could potentially prevent an additional 2555 breast cancers and 485 ovarian cancers in the Canadian population, corresponding to averting 196 breast cancer deaths and 163 ovarian cancer deaths per 1 000 000 population. Conclusions and Relevance In this economic evaluation, population-based BRCA testing was cost-effective compared with FH-based testing in Canada from payer and societal perspectives. These findings suggest that changing the genetic testing paradigm to population-based testing could prevent thousands of breast and ovarian cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Sun
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Xia Wei
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Caitlin T. Fierheller
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lesa Dawson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jacqueline Sia
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Fabio Feldman
- Prevention, Screening, Hereditary Cancer Program and Quality, Safety & Accreditation, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Kasmintan A. Schrader
- Hereditary Cancer Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Rosa Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Janice S. Kwon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Moss E, Taylor A, Andreou A, Ang C, Arora R, Attygalle A, Banerjee S, Bowen R, Buckley L, Burbos N, Coleridge S, Edmondson R, El-Bahrawy M, Fotopoulou C, Frost J, Ganesan R, George A, Hanna L, Kaur B, Manchanda R, Maxwell H, Michael A, Miles T, Newton C, Nicum S, Ratnavelu N, Ryan N, Sundar S, Vroobel K, Walther A, Wong J, Morrison J. British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) ovarian, tubal and primary peritoneal cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice update 2024. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2024; 300:69-123. [PMID: 39002401 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.06.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2024] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 07/15/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Moss
- College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
| | | | - Adrian Andreou
- Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK
| | - Christine Ang
- Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead, UK
| | - Rupali Arora
- Department of Cellular Pathology, University College London NHS Trust, 60 Whitfield Street, London W1T 4E, UK
| | | | | | - Rebecca Bowen
- Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK
| | - Lynn Buckley
- Beverley Counselling & Psychotherapy, 114 Holme Church Lane, Beverley, East Yorkshire HU17 0PY, UK
| | - Nikos Burbos
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital Colney Lane, Norwich NR4 7UY, UK
| | | | - Richard Edmondson
- Saint Mary's Hospital, Manchester and University of Manchester, M13 9WL, UK
| | - Mona El-Bahrawy
- Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK
| | | | - Jonathan Frost
- Gynaecological Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath, Bath BA1 3NG, UK; University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Raji Ganesan
- Department of Cellular Pathology, Birmingham Women's Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TG, UK
| | | | - Louise Hanna
- Department of Oncology, Velindre Cancer Centre, Whitchurch, Cardiff CF14 2TL, UK
| | - Baljeet Kaur
- North West London Pathology (NWLP), Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London and Barts Health NHS Trust, UK
| | - Hillary Maxwell
- Dorset County Hospital, Williams Avenue, Dorchester, Dorset DT1 2JY, UK
| | - Agnieszka Michael
- Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX and University of Surrey, School of Biosciences, GU2 7WG, UK
| | - Tracey Miles
- Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK
| | - Claire Newton
- Gynaecology Oncology Department, St Michael's Hospital, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol BS1 3NU, UK
| | - Shibani Nicum
- Department of Oncology, University College London Cancer Institute, London, UK
| | | | - Neil Ryan
- The Centre for Reproductive Health, Institute for Regeneration and Repair (IRR), 4-5 Little France Drive, Edinburgh BioQuarter City, Edinburgh EH16 4UU, UK
| | - Sudha Sundar
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham and Pan Birmingham Gynaecological Cancer Centre, City Hospital, Birmingham B18 7QH, UK
| | - Katherine Vroobel
- Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Marsden Foundation NHS Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Axel Walther
- Bristol Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Jason Wong
- Department of Histopathology, East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust, Ipswich Hospital, Heath Road, Ipswich IP4 5PD, UK
| | - Jo Morrison
- University of Exeter, Exeter, UK; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, GRACE Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton TA1 5DA, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sarig K, Oxley S, Kalra A, Sobocan M, Fierheller CT, Sideris M, Gootzen T, Ferris M, Eeles RA, Evans DG, Quaife SL, Manchanda R. BRCA awareness and testing experience in the UK Jewish population: a qualitative study. J Med Genet 2024; 61:716-725. [PMID: 38575303 DOI: 10.1136/jmg-2023-109576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 03/09/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND 1 in 40 UK Jewish individuals carry a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/BRCA2. Traditional testing criteria miss half of carriers, and so population genetic testing is being piloted for Jewish people in England. There has been no qualitative research into the factors influencing BRCA awareness and testing experience in this group. This study aimed to explore these and inform improvements for the implementation of population genetic testing. METHODS Qualitative study of UK Jewish adults who have undergone BRCA testing. We conducted one-to-one semistructured interviews via telephone or video call using a predefined topic guide, until sufficient information power was reached. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and interpreted using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS 32 individuals were interviewed (28 carriers, 4 non-carriers). We interpreted five themes intersecting across six time points of the testing pathway: (1) individual differences regarding personal/family history of cancer, demographics and personal attitudes/approach; (2) healthcare professionals' support; (3) pathway access and integration; (4) nature of family/partner relationships; and (5) Jewish community factors. Testing was largely triggered by connecting information to a personal/family history of cancer. No participants reported decision regret, although there was huge variation in satisfaction. Suggestions were given around increasing UK Jewish community awareness, making information and support services personally relevant and proactive case management of carriers. CONCLUSIONS There is a need to improve UK Jewish community BRCA awareness and to highlight personal relevance of testing for individuals without a personal/family history of cancer. Traditional testing criteria caused multiple issues regarding test access and experience. Carriers want information and support services tailored to their individual circumstances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Monika Sobocan
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
| | | | - Michail Sideris
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | - Rosalind A Eeles
- Oncogenetics, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Oxley SG, Wei X, Sideris M, Blyuss O, Kalra A, Sia JJY, Ganesan S, Fierheller CT, Sun L, Sadique Z, Jin H, Manchanda R, Legood R. Utility Scores for Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy: Mapping to EQ-5D. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1358. [PMID: 38611036 PMCID: PMC11010846 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16071358] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2024] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) are the most effective breast and ovarian cancer preventive interventions. EQ-5D is the recommended tool to assess the quality of life and determine health-related utility scores (HRUSs), yet there are no published EQ-5D HRUSs after these procedures. These are essential for clinicians counselling patients and for health-economic evaluations. METHODS We used aggregate data from our published systematic review and converted SF-36/SF-12 summary scores to EQ-5D HRUSs using a published mapping algorithm. Study control arm or age-matched country-specific reference values provided comparison. Random-effects meta-analysis provided adjusted disutilities and utility scores. Subgroup analyses included long-term vs. short-term follow-up. RESULTS Four studies (209 patients) reported RRM outcomes using SF-36, and five studies (742 patients) reported RRSO outcomes using SF-12/SF-36. RRM is associated with a long-term (>2 years) disutility of -0.08 (95% CI -0.11, -0.04) (I2 31.4%) and a utility of 0.92 (95% CI 0.88, 0.95) (I2 31.4%). RRSO is associated with a long-term (>1 year) disutility of -0.03 (95% CI -0.05, 0.00) (I2 17.2%) and a utility of 0.97 (95% CI 0.94, 0.99) (I2 34.0%). CONCLUSIONS We present the first HRUSs sourced from patients following RRM and RRSO. There is a need for high-quality prospective studies to characterise quality of life at different timepoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G. Oxley
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Xia Wei
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (L.S.); (Z.S.)
| | - Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Oleg Blyuss
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Pediatrics and Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Institute of Child´s Health, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Sechenov University, Moscow 119991, Russia
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Jacqueline J. Y. Sia
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Subhasheenee Ganesan
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
| | - Caitlin T. Fierheller
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
| | - Li Sun
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (L.S.); (Z.S.)
| | - Zia Sadique
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (L.S.); (Z.S.)
| | - Haomiao Jin
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7YH, UK;
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (L.S.); (Z.S.)
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| | - Rosa Legood
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (S.G.O.); (X.W.); (M.S.); (O.B.); (A.K.); (J.J.Y.S.); (S.G.); (C.T.F.)
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (L.S.); (Z.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Filip CI, Cătană A, Kutasi E, Roman SA, Militaru MS, Risteiu GA, Dindelengan GC. Breast Cancer Screening and Prophylactic Mastectomy for High-Risk Women in Romania. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2024; 60:570. [PMID: 38674216 PMCID: PMC11052261 DOI: 10.3390/medicina60040570] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2024] [Revised: 03/10/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024]
Abstract
Breast cancer remains a significant contributor to morbidity and mortality within oncology. Risk factors, encompassing genetic and environmental influences, significantly contribute to its prevalence. While germline mutations, notably within the BRCA genes, are commonly associated with heightened breast cancer risk, a spectrum of other variants exists among affected individuals. Diagnosis relies on imaging techniques, biopsies, biomarkers, and genetic testing, facilitating personalised risk assessment through specific scoring systems. Breast cancer screening programs employing mammography and other imaging modalities play a crucial role in early detection and management, leading to improved outcomes for affected individuals. Regular screening enables the identification of suspicious lesions or abnormalities at earlier stages, facilitating timely intervention and potentially reducing mortality rates associated with breast cancer. Genetic mutations guide screening protocols, prophylactic interventions, treatment modalities, and patient prognosis. Prophylactic measures encompass a range of interventions, including chemoprevention, hormonal inhibition, oophorectomy, and mastectomy. Despite their efficacy in mitigating breast cancer incidence, these interventions carry potential side effects and psychological implications, necessitating comprehensive counselling tailored to individual cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudiu Ioan Filip
- Department of Plastic Surgery and Burn Unit, Emergency District Hospital, 400535 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (C.I.F.); (G.C.D.)
- First Surgical Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Andreea Cătană
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (A.C.); (E.K.); (S.A.R.); (G.A.R.)
- Department of Oncogeneticcs, Institute of Oncology, “Prof. Dr. I. Chiricuță”, 400015 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Regional Laboratory Cluj-Napoca, Department of Medical Genetics, Regina Maria Health Network, 400363 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Eniko Kutasi
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (A.C.); (E.K.); (S.A.R.); (G.A.R.)
| | - Sara Alexia Roman
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (A.C.); (E.K.); (S.A.R.); (G.A.R.)
| | - Mariela Sanda Militaru
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (A.C.); (E.K.); (S.A.R.); (G.A.R.)
- Regional Laboratory Cluj-Napoca, Department of Medical Genetics, Regina Maria Health Network, 400363 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Giulia Andreea Risteiu
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (A.C.); (E.K.); (S.A.R.); (G.A.R.)
| | - George Călin Dindelengan
- Department of Plastic Surgery and Burn Unit, Emergency District Hospital, 400535 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; (C.I.F.); (G.C.D.)
- First Surgical Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Iuliu Hatieganu”, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sideris M, Menon U, Manchanda R. Screening and prevention of ovarian cancer. Med J Aust 2024; 220:264-274. [PMID: 38353066 PMCID: PMC7617385 DOI: 10.5694/mja2.52227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 03/07/2024]
Abstract
Ovarian cancer remains the most lethal gynaecological malignancy with 314 000 cases and 207 000 deaths annually worldwide. Ovarian cancer cases and deaths are predicted to increase in Australia by 42% and 55% respectively by 2040. Earlier detection and significant downstaging of ovarian cancer have been demonstrated with multimodal screening in the largest randomised controlled trial of ovarian cancer screening in women at average population risk. However, none of the randomised trials have demonstrated a mortality benefit. Therefore, ovarian cancer screening is not currently recommended in women at average population risk. More frequent surveillance for ovarian cancer every three to four months in women at high risk has shown good performance characteristics and significant downstaging, but there is no available information on a survival benefit. Population testing offers an emerging novel strategy to identify women at high risk who can benefit from ovarian cancer prevention. Novel multicancer early detection biomarker, longitudinal multiple marker strategies, and new biomarkers are being investigated and evaluated for ovarian cancer screening. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) decreases ovarian cancer incidence and mortality and is recommended for women at over a 4-5% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Pre-menopausal women without contraindications to hormone replacement therapy (HRT) undergoing RRSO should be offered HRT until 51 years of age to minimise the detrimental consequences of premature menopause. Currently risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) should only be offered to women at increased risk of ovarian cancer within the context of a research trial. Pre-menopausal early salpingectomy is associated with fewer menopausal symptoms and better sexual function than bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbria (SEE-FIM) protocol should be used for histopathological assessment in women at high risk of ovarian cancer who are undergoing surgical prevention. Opportunistic salpingectomy may be offered at routine gynaecological surgery to all women who have completed their family. Long term prospective opportunistic salpingectomy studies are needed to determine the effect size of ovarian cancer risk reduction and the impact on menopause.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Usha Menon
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
- Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Morgan O, Belda R, Schnur J, Montgomery G, Parmar S, Chirivella I, Cano A. Prophylactic mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review of postsurgical sexual function and menopausal hormone therapy symptom mitigation. Sex Med Rev 2023; 12:3-13. [PMID: 37183167 PMCID: PMC11996082 DOI: 10.1093/sxmrev/qead020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Revised: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Preventative surgical procedures for patients who are breast cancer (BRCA) positive-namely, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy-have been linked to changes in sexual function, including surgically induced menopause. A patient's decision to undergo preventive surgery as opposed to high-risk screening is heavily reliant on advice received from one's health care provider. Quality of life should be considered when shared decision making is conducted with patients. OBJECTIVES To assemble and analyze findings related to patient-reported sexual function after these surgical procedures, to see if and how either procedure affects sexual function from patient baseline, and to determine whether the effects can be mitigated with menopausal hormone therapy. METHODS A literature review based on the PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases was conducted from inception through January 25, 2022. To be included, studies had to meet an a priori list of Medical Subject Headings: "BRCA" AND "sexual dysfunction" OR "dyspareunia." GRADE criteria were used to determine the quality of studies relating to menopause hormone therapy. RESULTS The search yielded 14 results, and 11 reported sufficient data for systematic review. Sexual function was measured via validated and investigator-generated surveys. All studies, no matter the survey metric, found significant reduction in sexual function with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy; no studies revealed sexual function changes associated with mastectomy postsurgery. Few studies indicated that menopause hormone therapy resulted in significant improvement in sexual function, and all studies reported that postoperative sexual function could not reach baseline levels with therapy. No studies were high quality by GRADE metrics. CONCLUSION Prophylactic mastectomies and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomies among patients who are BRCA positive cause SF changes postprocedure. Menopausal hormone therapy offers little help in mediating symptoms. Significantly more research is needed to explore potential changes in sexual function, as it is an important aspect of quality of life for patients with BRCA positivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Orly Morgan
- Department of Medical Education, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL 33101, United States
| | - Rocio Belda
- Department of Paediatrics, Obstetrics, and Gynecology, University of Valencia, Valencia, 46003, Spain
| | - Julie Schnur
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, United States
| | - Guy Montgomery
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, United States
| | - Shivangi Parmar
- Department of Medical Education, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL 33101, United States
| | - Isabel Chirivella
- Department of Paediatrics, Obstetrics, and Gynecology, University of Valencia, Valencia, 46003, Spain
| | - Antonio Cano
- Department of Paediatrics, Obstetrics, and Gynecology, University of Valencia, Valencia, 46003, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Barker VE, Vlachodimitropoulou E, O'Brien P, Iskaros J, Rosenthal AN. Combined Bilateral Salpingo-oophorectomy and Cesarean Delivery in BRCA1/2 Alteration Carriers : A Case Series. Obstet Gynecol 2023; 142:1500-1503. [PMID: 37917945 PMCID: PMC10642698 DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000005423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2023] [Revised: 08/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 11/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cumulative lifetime risk of ovarian cancer is 16-68% and 11-30% in female BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene alteration carriers, respectively. Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is the only proven way to reduce ovarian cancer mortality. We report a series of patients who underwent risk-reducing surgery at the time of planned obstetric-indicated cesarean delivery. CASES This is a case series of four women carrying a pathogenic germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene alteration who underwent RRSO at the time of cesarean delivery between March 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022. All women were referred during pregnancy to the University College London Hospitals Familial Cancer Clinic for consideration of RRSO at the time of obstetric-indicated cesarean delivery. Women were considered eligible for RRSO if they had a proven pathogenic germline alteration, would have completed childbearing after the cesarean delivery, and were older than age 35 or 40 years with BRCA1 or BRCA2 alterations, respectively. Operating time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, length of hospital stay, complications, and ability to breastfeed were assessed and, where possible, compared with the institutional means for similar patients who underwent cesarean delivery only, to determine whether RRSO was associated with increased morbidity. Women were contacted 11-59 months postprocedure to assess satisfaction. The mean blood loss was 687 mL (range 400-1,000 mL), mean operating time was 68 minutes, mean length of hospital stay was 3 days, and mean change in hemoglobin was -1 g/dL. No patient required a transfusion, had internal organ damage, returned to the operating room, or was readmitted. One of two women with intact breast tissue successfully breastfed, and the other chose to bottle feed. The mean contemporaneous institutional blood loss for cesarean delivery was not significantly different at 681 mL for singleton pregnancies and 872 mL for twin pregnancies. All four women reported a high level of satisfaction with the combined procedure. CONCLUSION Our results show that RRSO can be performed at the time of cesarean delivery with high patient satisfaction. This approach can be offered to appropriately counseled individuals, with the benefit of avoiding the need for two separate procedures, with potentially reduced patient morbidity and health care costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria E Barker
- University College London Hospitals, National Health Service Foundation Trust, and the Department of Women's Cancer, University College London Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Brincat MR, Mira AR, Lawrence A. Current and Emerging Strategies for Tubo-Ovarian Cancer Diagnostics. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:3331. [PMID: 37958227 PMCID: PMC10647517 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13213331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2023] [Revised: 10/22/2023] [Accepted: 10/27/2023] [Indexed: 11/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Tubo-ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynaecological cancer. More than 75% of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, which is associated with poorer overall survival. Symptoms at presentation are vague and non-specific, contributing to late diagnosis. Multimodal risk models have improved the diagnostic accuracy of adnexal mass assessment based on patient risk factors, coupled with findings on imaging and serum-based biomarker tests. Newly developed ultrasonographic assessment algorithms have standardised documentation and enable stratification of care between local hospitals and cancer centres. So far, no screening test has proven to reduce ovarian cancer mortality in the general population. This review is an update on the evidence behind ovarian cancer diagnostic strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark R. Brincat
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1FR, UK
| | - Ana Rita Mira
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1FR, UK
- Hospital Garcia de Orta, 2805-267 Almada, Portugal
| | - Alexandra Lawrence
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London E1 1FR, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Wei X, Oxley S, Sideris M, Kalra A, Brentnall A, Sun L, Yang L, Legood R, Manchanda R. Quality of life after risk-reducing surgery for breast and ovarian cancer prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023; 229:388-409.e4. [PMID: 37059410 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.03.045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2022] [Revised: 03/30/2023] [Accepted: 03/31/2023] [Indexed: 04/16/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to assess the impact of risk-reducing surgery for breast cancer and ovarian cancer prevention on quality of life. We considered risk-reducing mastectomy, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, and risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy. DATA SOURCES We followed a prospective protocol (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42022319782) and searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We followed a PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design) framework. The population included women at increased risk of breast cancer or ovarian cancer. We focused on studies reporting quality of life outcomes (health-related quality of life, sexual function, menopause symptoms, body image, cancer-related distress or worry, anxiety, or depression) after risk-reducing surgery, including risk-reducing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer. METHODS We used the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) for study appraisal. Qualitative synthesis and fixed-effects meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS A total of 34 studies were included (risk-reducing mastectomy: 16 studies; risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: 19 studies; risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy: 2 studies). Health-related quality of life was unchanged or improved in 13 of 15 studies after risk-reducing mastectomy (N=986) and 10 of 16 studies after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (N=1617), despite short-term deficits (N=96 after risk-reducing mastectomy and N=459 after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy). Sexual function (using the Sexual Activity Questionnaire) was affected in 13 of 16 studies (N=1400) after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in terms of decreased sexual pleasure (-1.21 [-1.53 to -0.89]; N=3070) and increased sexual discomfort (1.12 [0.93-1.31]; N=1400). Hormone replacement therapy after premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with an increase (1.16 [0.17-2.15]; N=291) in sexual pleasure and a decrease (-1.20 [-1.75 to -0.65]; N=157) in sexual discomfort. Sexual function was affected in 4 of 13 studies (N=147) after risk-reducing mastectomy, but stable in 9 of 13 studies (N=799). Body image was unaffected in 7 of 13 studies (N=605) after risk-reducing mastectomy, whereas 6 of 13 studies (N=391) reported worsening. Increased menopause symptoms were reported in 12 of 13 studies (N=1759) after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy with a reduction (-1.96 [-2.81 to -1.10]; N=1745) in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Endocrine Symptoms. Cancer-related distress was unchanged or decreased in 5 of 5 studies after risk-reducing mastectomy (N=365) and 8 of 10 studies after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (N=1223). Risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (2 studies, N=413) led to better sexual function and menopause-specific quality of life. CONCLUSION Risk-reducing surgery may be associated with quality of life outcomes. Risk-reducing mastectomy and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy reduce cancer-related distress, and do not affect health-related quality of life. Women and clinicians should be aware of body image problems after risk-reducing mastectomy, and of sexual dysfunction and menopause symptoms after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. Risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy may be a promising alternative to mitigate quality of life-related risks of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xia Wei
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Brentnall
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Li Sun
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Li Yang
- School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Rosa Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Cancer Research UK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Perez L, Webster E, Bull L, Brewer JT, Ahsan MD, Lin J, Levi SR, Cantillo E, Chapman-Davis E, Holcomb K, Rosenberg SM, Frey MK. Patient perspectives on risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer risk-reduction: A systematic review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 173:106-113. [PMID: 37116391 PMCID: PMC10650971 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2023] [Revised: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 04/30/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Increasing evidence suggests the fallopian tube as the site of origin of BRCA1/2-associated high-grade ovarian cancers. Several ongoing trials are evaluating salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRSDO) for ovarian cancer risk reduction and patients are beginning to ask their clinicians about this surgical option. This study sought to systematically review the available literature examining patient preferences regarding RRSDO and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) to provide clinicians with an understanding of patient values, concerns, and priorities surrounding ovarian cancer risk-reducing surgery. METHODS We conducted a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO No.: CRD42023400690). We searched key electronic databases to identify studies evaluating acceptance and surgical decision-making regarding RRSO and RRSDO among patients with an increased risk of ovarian cancer. RESULTS The search yielded 239 results, among which six publications met the systematic review inclusion criteria. Acceptance of RRSDO was evaluated in all studies and ranged from 34% to 71%. Factors positively impacting patients' acceptance of RRSDO included: avoidance of surgical menopause, preservation of fertility, concerns about sexual dysfunction, family history of breast cancer, and avoidance of hormone replacement therapy. Factors limiting this acceptance reported by patients included concerns regarding oncologic safety, surgical timing, and surgical complications. CONCLUSION To date, few studies have explored patient perspectives surrounding RRSDO. Collectively, the limited data available indicate a high level of acceptance among BRCA1/2 carriers, and provides insight regarding both facilitating and limiting factors associated with patient preferences to better equip clinicians in the counseling and support of their patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luiza Perez
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Emily Webster
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Leslie Bull
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Jesse T Brewer
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | | | - Jenny Lin
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Sarah R Levi
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Evelyn Cantillo
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Eloise Chapman-Davis
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Kevin Holcomb
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Shoshana M Rosenberg
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Melissa K Frey
- Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Suite J-130, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cost-Effectiveness of Risk-Reducing Surgery for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prevention: A Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14246117. [PMID: 36551605 PMCID: PMC9776851 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2022] [Revised: 12/04/2022] [Accepted: 12/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Policymakers require robust cost-effectiveness evidence of risk-reducing-surgery (RRS) for decision making on resource allocation for breast cancer (BC)/ovarian cancer (OC)/endometrial cancer (EC) prevention. We aimed to summarise published data on the cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM)/risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO)/risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) for BC/OC prevention in intermediate/high-risk populations; hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) in Lynch syndrome women; and opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) for OC prevention in baseline-risk populations. Major databases were searched until December 2021 following a prospective protocol (PROSPERO-CRD42022338008). Data were qualitatively synthesised following a PICO framework. Twenty two studies were included, with a reporting quality varying from 53.6% to 82.1% of the items scored in the CHEERS checklist. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio/incremental cost-utility ratio and cost thresholds were inflated and converted to US$2020, using the original currency consumer price index (CPI) and purchasing power parities (PPP), for comparison. Eight studies concluded that RRM and/or RRSO were cost-effective compared to surveillance/no surgery for BRCA1/2, while RRESDO was cost-effective compared to RRSO in one study. Three studies found that hysterectomy with BSO was cost-effective compared to surveillance in Lynch syndrome women. Two studies showed that RRSO was also cost-effective at ≥4%/≥5% lifetime OC risk for pre-/post-menopausal women, respectively. Seven studies demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of OBS at hysterectomy (n = 4), laparoscopic sterilisation (n = 4) or caesarean section (n = 2). This systematic review confirms that RRS is cost-effective, while the results are context-specific, given the diversity in the target populations, health systems and model assumptions, and sensitive to the disutility, age and uptake rates associated with RRS. Additionally, RRESDO/OBS were sensitive to the uncertainty concerning the effect sizes in terms of the OC-risk reduction and long-term health impact. Our findings are relevant for policymakers/service providers and the design of future research studies.
Collapse
|
15
|
Gaba F, Oxley S, Liu X, Yang X, Chandrasekaran D, Kalsi J, Antoniou A, Side L, Sanderson S, Waller J, Ahmed M, Wallace A, Wallis Y, Menon U, Jacobs I, Legood R, Marks D, Manchanda R. Unselected Population Genetic Testing for Personalised Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction: A Qualitative Study Using Semi-Structured Interviews. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:1028. [PMID: 35626184 PMCID: PMC9139231 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12051028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 04/11/2022] [Accepted: 04/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Unselected population-based personalised ovarian cancer (OC) risk assessments combining genetic, epidemiological and hormonal data have not previously been undertaken. We aimed to understand the attitudes, experiences and impact on the emotional well-being of women from the general population who underwent unselected population genetic testing (PGT) for personalised OC risk prediction and who received low-risk (<5% lifetime risk) results. This qualitative study was set within recruitment to a pilot PGT study using an OC risk tool and telephone helpline. OC-unaffected women ≥ 18 years and with no prior OC gene testing were ascertained through primary care in London. In-depth, semi-structured and 1:1 interviews were conducted until informational saturation was reached following nine interviews. Six interconnected themes emerged: health beliefs; decision making; factors influencing acceptability; effect on well-being; results communication; satisfaction. Satisfaction with testing was high and none expressed regret. All felt the telephone helpline was helpful and should remain optional. Delivery of low-risk results reduced anxiety. However, care must be taken to emphasise that low risk does not equal no risk. The main facilitators were ease of testing, learning about children’s risk and a desire to prevent disease. Barriers included change in family dynamics, insurance, stigmatisation and personality traits associated with stress/worry. PGT for personalised OC risk prediction in women in the general population had high acceptability/satisfaction and reduced anxiety in low-risk individuals. Facilitators/barriers observed were similar to those reported with genetic testing from high-risk cancer clinics and unselected PGT in the Jewish population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Faiza Gaba
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Xinting Liu
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
| | - Xin Yang
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; (X.Y.); (A.A.)
| | - Dhivya Chandrasekaran
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Jatinderpal Kalsi
- Department of Women’s Cancer, University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 6BT, UK;
| | - Antonis Antoniou
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; (X.Y.); (A.A.)
| | - Lucy Side
- Department of Clinical Genetics, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Rd, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK;
| | - Saskia Sanderson
- Early Disease Detection Research Project UK (EDDRP UK), 2 Redman Place, London E20 1JQ, UK;
| | - Jo Waller
- Cancer Prevention Group, King’s College London, Great Maze Pond, London SE1 9RT, UK;
| | - Munaza Ahmed
- North East Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Department Clinical Genetics, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London WC1N 3JH, UK;
| | - Andrew Wallace
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, 6th Floor Saint Marys Hospital, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9WL, UK;
| | - Yvonne Wallis
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory, Birmingham Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2TG, UK;
| | - Usha Menon
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK;
| | - Ian Jacobs
- Department of Women’s Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia;
| | - Rosa Legood
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
| | - Dalya Marks
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK;
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
- Department of Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Xiao Y, Liu YX, Li RN, Wei X, Wang QM, Gu QY, Linghu H. Lymphadenectomy in Primary Fallopian Tube Cancer is Associated with Improved Survival. J INVEST SURG 2022; 35:1417-1423. [PMID: 35344678 DOI: 10.1080/08941939.2022.2048142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Primary fallopian tube cancer (PFTC) shares the same diagnostic and management guidelines with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The LION trail raised concerns regarding the role of systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy during debulking surgery. We aimed to evaluate the significance of lymphadenectomy in PFTC survival. METHODS This retrospective study analyzed the clinical features and survival of patients with PFTC who underwent primary surgery in our center between January 2013 and October 2020. RESULTS Sixty-one patients diagnosed with PFTC were included in the study. Twenty-five (41.0%, 25/61) were diagnosed with FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stages I/II and 36 (59.0%, 36/61) were diagnosed with stage III/IV. Twenty-nine (47.5%, 29/61) underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy, among which 12 (41.4%, 12/29) had lymph node metastasis confirmed by postoperative pathology. The mean progression-free survival was 60.4 months in the lymphadenectomy group and 37.8 months in the no-lymphadenectomy group (p = 0.042, HR 0.374, 95% CI 0.145-0.966). CONCLUSIONS PFTC is often diagnosed earlier and has a better prognosis than EOC. Most patients with PFTC would benefit from lymphadenectomy. However, the extent to which this association translates to a more diverse population needs to be further identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yao Xiao
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Yue-Xi Liu
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Ruo-Nan Li
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Xing Wei
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Qing-Miao Wang
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Qiu-Ying Gu
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Hua Linghu
- Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Manchanda R, Gaba F, Talaulikar V, Pundir J, Gessler S, Davies M, Menon U. Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and the Use of Hormone Replacement Therapy Below the Age of Natural Menopause: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66 October 2021: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66. BJOG 2022; 129:e16-e34. [PMID: 34672090 PMCID: PMC7614764 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16896] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
This paper deals with the use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after the removal of fallopian tubes and ovaries to prevent ovarian cancer in premenopausal high risk women. Some women have an alteration in their genetic code, which makes them more likely to develop ovarian cancer. Two well-known genes which can carry an alteration are the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Examples of other genes associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer include RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 and Lynch syndrome genes. Women with a strong family history of ovarian cancer and/or breast cancer, may also be at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women at increased risk can choose to have an operation to remove the fallopian tubes and ovaries, which is the most effective way to prevent ovarian cancer. This is done after a woman has completed her family. However, removal of ovaries causes early menopause and leads to hot flushes, sweats, mood changes and bone thinning. It can also cause memory problems and increases the risk of heart disease. It may reduce libido or impair sexual function. Guidance on how to care for women following preventative surgery who are experiencing early menopause is needed. HRT is usually advisable for women up to 51 years of age (average age of menopause for women in the UK) who are undergoing early menopause and have not had breast cancer, to minimise the health risks linked to early menopause. For women with a womb, HRT should include estrogen coupled with progestogen to protect against thickening of the lining of the womb (called endometrial hyperplasia). For women without a womb, only estrogen is given. Research suggests that, unlike in older women, HRT for women in early menopause does not increase breast cancer risk, including in those who are BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and have preventative surgery. For women with a history of receptor-negative breast cancer, the gynaecologist will liaise with an oncology doctor on a case-by-case basis to help to decide if HRT is safe to use. Women with a history of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are not normally offered HRT. A range of other therapies can be used if a woman is unable to take HRT. These include behavioural therapy and non-hormonal medicines. However, these are less effective than HRT. Regular exercise, healthy lifestyle and avoiding symptom triggers are also advised. Whether to undergo surgery to reduce risk or not and its timing can be a complex decision-making process. Women need to be carefully counselled on the pros and cons of both preventative surgery and HRT use so they can make informed decisions and choices.
Collapse
|
18
|
Lim H, Kim SI, Hyun S, Lee GB, Seol A, Lee M. Uptake Rate of Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and Surgical Outcomes of Female Germline BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Yonsei Med J 2021; 62:1090-1097. [PMID: 34816639 PMCID: PMC8612856 DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2021.62.12.1090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Revised: 09/02/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study investigated the uptake rate of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and surgical outcomes of germline BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH). MATERIALS AND METHODS We examined the records of 824 women who underwent germline BRCA1/2 gene testing at SNUH between 2005 and 2020. Among them, we identified women with a pathogenic mutation on either the BRCA1 or the BRCA2 gene, and excluded ovarian cancer patients. Characteristics of participants who underwent RRSO (RRSO group) were compared to those who did not (non-RRSO group). Surgical outcomes and pathologic results were investigated in the RRSO group. RESULTS There were 117 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers included in the analysis. The uptake rate of RRSO was 70.1% (82/117). Older age (mean: 48.8 years vs. 42.1 years; p=0.002) and higher employment rate (65.9% vs. 14.3%; p<0.001) were observed in the RRSO group compared to the non-RRSO group. However, no differences in other factors, such as personal and family history of breast cancer, were observed between the two groups. In the RRSO group, the median time interval between the genetic test and RRSO was 10.0 months, and there were three (3.7%) incidental cases of high-grade serous carcinoma. However, one patient in the non-RRSO group developed primary peritoneal cancer after 103.8 months of surveillance. CONCLUSION The uptake rate of RRSO in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers was about 70%. Considering incidental cancer cases in women without abnormal findings on preoperative evaluation, BRCA1/2-mutated women might refrain from the delayed implementation of RRSO after the genetic test.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyunji Lim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Se Ik Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Seoul National University Hospital Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sowoon Hyun
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Gwang Bin Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Aeran Seol
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Maria Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gaba F, Goyal S, Marks D, Chandrasekaran D, Evans O, Robbani S, Tyson C, Legood R, Saridogan E, McCluggage WG, Hanson H, Singh N, Evans DG, Menon U, Manchanda R. Surgical decision making in premenopausal BRCA carriers considering risk-reducing early salpingectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy: a qualitative study. J Med Genet 2021; 59:122-132. [PMID: 33568437 PMCID: PMC8788252 DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2020] [Revised: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 11/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Acceptance of the role of the fallopian tube in 'ovarian' carcinogenesis and the detrimental sequelae of surgical menopause in premenopausal women following risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has resulted in risk-reducing early-salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) being proposed as an attractive alternative risk-reducing strategy in women who decline/delay oophorectomy. We present the results of a qualitative study evaluating the decision-making process among BRCA carriers considering prophylactic surgeries (RRSO/RRESDO) as part of the multicentre PROTECTOR trial (ISRCTN:25173360). METHODS In-depth semistructured 1:1 interviews conducted using a predeveloped topic-guide (development informed by literature review and expert consultation) until informational saturation reached. Wording and sequencing of questions were left open with probes used to elicit additional information. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, transcripts analysed using an inductive theoretical framework and data managed using NVIVO-v12. RESULTS Informational saturation was reached following 24 interviews. Seven interconnected themes integral to surgical decision making were identified: fertility/menopause/cancer risk reduction/surgical choices/surgical complications/sequence of ovarian-and-breast prophylactic surgeries/support/satisfaction. Women for whom maximising ovarian cancer risk reduction was relatively more important than early menopause/quality-of-life preferred RRSO, whereas those more concerned about detrimental impact of menopause chose RRESDO. Women managed in specialist familial cancer clinic settings compared with non-specialist settings felt they received better quality care, improved hormone replacement therapy access and were more satisfied. CONCLUSION Multiple contextual factors (medical, physical, psychological, social) influence timing of risk-reducing surgeries. RRESDO offers women delaying/declining premenopausal oophorectomy, particularly those concerned about menopausal effects, a degree of ovarian cancer risk reduction while avoiding early menopause. Care of high-risk women should be centralised to centres with specialist familial gynaecological cancer risk management services to provide a better-quality, streamlined, holistic multidisciplinary approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Faiza Gaba
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London-Charterhouse Square Campus, London, UK.,Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Shivam Goyal
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Dalya Marks
- Department of Public Health, Environments and Society, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Dhivya Chandrasekaran
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London-Charterhouse Square Campus, London, UK.,Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Olivia Evans
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London-Charterhouse Square Campus, London, UK.,Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Sadiyah Robbani
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Charlotte Tyson
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Rosa Legood
- Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Ertan Saridogan
- Department of Gynaecology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - W Glenn McCluggage
- Department of Pathology, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | - Helen Hanson
- South West Thames Regional Genetics Service, South West Thames Regional Genetic Services, London, UK
| | - Naveena Singh
- Department of Pathology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - D Gareth Evans
- Centre for Genomic Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Usha Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK .,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|